Passenger Trains > What if the Hudson River tunnels close, for good?

NJ.com's transportation reporter describes the results in apocalyptic terms. Nightmare, endless snarl.

The plain truth is not a lane of pavement or single rail has been added to the TransHudson commute from NJ in 50 years (and that's the Verazzano bridge). The Lincoln Tunnel's third tube was added in the mid 1950s.  The only additional capacity has been the ferries.

The logistics say that if one tunnel failed, the capacity of the remaining tunnel would be six trains per hour. If you accept that number, and figure Amtrak would take at least two (and try to take all six), that would leave somewhere between four and zero for NJT. (I'm not sure I buy that argument, esp if more trains ran through to SSY, and fewer trains ran against the current. And, if another crossover was established between Secaucus and the west/south Portal.)

This story is a follow up to the editorial yesterday that Governor Christie and the Legislature are playing chicken with what will inevitably be a massive regional gridlock when a tunnel fails.

Nightmare scenario
 

I wonder how big of a hit the market value of NJ residential real estate would take?

ts1457 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I wonder how big of a hit the market value of NJ
> residential real estate would take?

it would be very substantial in Bergen, Morris, Monmouth counties. And places like Short Hills, etc.

But, it would probably encourage some companies to shift more operations to places like Jersey City, Middletown, Florham Park,  Paramus, etc.

Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee!

Tor in Eugene

And why wouldn't Amtrak take all the slots?  They own the ROW, don't they?

sums007 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And why wouldn't Amtrak take all the slots?  They
> own the ROW, don't they?

There's a contract which covers the relationship with NJ Transit.  I haven't read it, but I'm sure it discusses how capacity issues are resolved.

(Not to mention that (NJ Senators) Menendez and Booker are among Amtrak's better friends in the Senate. Pissing them off would probably not be to Amtrak's benefit.)

Gov. Christie was more than willing to build the new tunnel up to and including a set amount of dollars to be born by NJ, not a penny more.  The Feds needed to come up with the cost of any overruns which they declined to do.  The good folks of NJ are taxed higher than any other state (NY and CT are close in comparison).  So if there are any complaints here, blame the administration and the Reid/Pelosi (at that time)i controlled congress. 
Why not add a surcharge to all Amtrak and NJ Transit tickets on lines that would utilize the a new tunnel?  The airlines tack on special operational costs, security etc.
 

No ticket tax can ever come up with $15 Billion. Furthermore , a ticket tax or a fare increae is still a tax increase, so that hardly gets around with paying any more taxes.

I don't understand the money problem.

Amtrak keeps saying, and the TV stations, bloggers and writers all keep saying that the NEC makes money. 

Doesn't that include infrastructure, maintenance and capital?

PennPlat Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gov. Christie was more than willing to build the
> new tunnel up to and including a set amount of
> dollars to be born by NJ, not a penny more.  The
> Feds needed to come up with the cost of any
> overruns which they declined to do.  The good
> folks of NJ are taxed higher than any other state
> (NY and CT are close in comparison).  So if there
> are any complaints here, blame the administration
> and the Reid/Pelosi (at that time)i controlled
> congress. 
> Why not add a surcharge to all Amtrak and NJ
> Transit tickets on lines that would utilize the a
> new tunnel?  The airlines tack on special
> operational costs, security etc.

Since NJT is by far the largest user of the tunnels it stands to reason both that it ebar a larger proportion of the cost and also a larger proportion of the risk. NJ was trying to put a cap on its own risk and foist the rest onto someone else. I am glad that the feds put their foot down. they had learned their lesson from the Boston big Dig. NY is coming up with its own money , some even from general federal aid, foregoing other projects that could have been funded, in order to cover the cost overruns of ESA and SAS. NJ should similarly learn to cover risks for and pay for what they need more than anyone else. For the amount of traffic that Amtrak has between NJ and NY they could even live with just one tunnel. It will be tight but they could manage. It is NJ that will get screwed.

< Doesn't that include infrastructure, maintenance and capital? >

Amtrak only makes an "above the rail" profit on NEC train operations of about $300 Million.
 

Lackawanna484:

> The logistics say that if one tunnel failed, the
> capacity of the remaining tunnel would be six
> trains per hour.

That's not right.  The tunnels carry 23 or 24 trains per hour in the peak direction per hour.  Currently, the opposite direction tunnel at the peak gets about half that.

They are already single tracked on weekends with about 8 or 10 trains per hour each way.

In the AM peak, you could still run around 16 trains per hour during 42 minutes in one direction, then reverse and run 5 trains per hour outbound.  That would mean pulling a couple of trains going to SSY from the schedule and eliminating half a dozen trains turning in Penn Station in each direction.

It would be bad, but it wouldn't be a catastrophe.  The schedule would be similar to what was run prior to SWIFT being opened to link the M&E.

 

abyler Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That's not right. . .

I agree with you, but you're undermining the "nightmare scenario" required to get the politicians to act before it's too late ;)  We need to keep our professional opinions to ourselves or NJT's rail service to NYPenn is done for ;)

 

Hell Gate bridge at one time did carry an extra fee for using for passengers using it  

Its about $13 bucks to use the George Washington bridge  round trip.   Airlines charge for luggage, etc

Pay to Play user fee..  


























































 

< In the AM peak, you could still run around 16 trains per hour during 42 minutes in one direction, then reverse and run 5 trains per hour outbound.  That would mean pulling a couple of trains going to SSY from the schedule and eliminating half a dozen trains turning in Penn Station in each direction. >

On weekends, there are 8 slots in each direction per hour, so 30 minutes per direction, a balanced load. Not all slots have a train. If anything is just a little late, it reverberates for a couple of hours. I was in that Saturday evening, everything crawling out of NYPS around 7pm even though there was just 1 Amtrak and 3 NJT trying to head west within 15 minutes, because an eastbound NJT train was late, though the single track portion was between Secaucus and Harrison for major track work.

As we all know, things do not run like they appear on paper. Both Amtrak and NJT are often having trains break down somewhere, and if not that, power problems, switch problems, or signals problems.

abyler Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lackawanna484:
>
> > The logistics say that if one tunnel failed,
> the
> > capacity of the remaining tunnel would be six
> > trains per hour.
>
> That's not right.  The tunnels carry 23 or 24
> trains per hour in the peak direction per hour.
>  Currently, the opposite direction tunnel at the
> peak gets about half that.
>
> They are already single tracked on weekends with
> about 8 or 10 trains per hour each way.
>
> In the AM peak, you could still run around 16
> trains per hour during 42 minutes in one
> direction, then reverse and run 5 trains per hour
> outbound.  That would mean pulling a couple of
> trains going to SSY from the schedule and
> eliminating half a dozen trains turning in Penn
> Station in each direction.
>
> It would be bad, but it wouldn't be a catastrophe.
>  The schedule would be similar to what was run
> prior to SWIFT being opened to link the M&E.
>
>  

I was just quoting the article.  <G>

As noted by another poster, getting the nightmare narrative front and center is key to making the story hold together